Looking to Stake Online Players!

[operaman]

I am up 50k this year. I just don't have the balls to play 25-50 with my money. I added the comment about 25-50 to let them know I have played that level and wasn't killed. 2 sessions to be exact. btw if i played 25-50 commonly I wouldn't be interested in someone staking me. What is up with all the neg. comments on this site? Get back to the the study of poker and stop trying to denegrate other people.

[TStoneMBD]

for those confused what this is all about, its probably just another way to market the word "rakeback" but in a much more flashy and attention demanding way.

[gila]

[ QUOTE ]
I am up 50k this year. I just don't have the balls to play 25-50 with my money. I added the comment about 25-50 to let them know I have played that level and wasn't killed. 2 sessions to be exact. btw if i played 25-50 commonly I wouldn't be interested in someone staking me. What is up with all the neg. comments on this site? Get back to the the study of poker and stop trying to denegrate other people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't take it personal, it's just that, saying you are up $2000 at 25/50 is saying absolutely nothing, i.e., the statement is meaningless. Saying you are down $2000 would say the same thing. And, then, saying these things, that are, in effect, saying nothing, makes one wonder what exactly you are trying to say; oh yea "I have played that level and wasn't killed". Wow, impressive!

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
I am up 50k this year. I just don't have the balls to play 25-50 with my money. I added the comment about 25-50 to let them know I have played that level and wasn't killed. 2 sessions to be exact. btw if i played 25-50 commonly I wouldn't be interested in someone staking me. What is up with all the neg. comments on this site? Get back to the the study of poker and stop trying to denegrate other people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just another newbie coming to these boards telling us how he's gods gift to poker and we should all respect him. Yawn.

[operaman]

how exactly am i saying i am gods gift to poker? there are many players better than me. I have also been registered on this site longer than you. I know you need up too 300k hands to have a rock solid reading on your win rate, but 8 hours being up 2k is different than being 8 hours and down 2k at a particular limit. I might not be a winning player at 25-50 but I might be. If i were down 2k the odds of me being a winning player would be much less.

People who are gods gift to poker are making 200k+ a year.
I am just a journeyman working to get better.
Lets move on ,this thread was stupid to begin with.

[gila]

[ QUOTE ]
but 8 hours being up 2k is different than being 8 hours and down 2k at a particular limit.

[/ QUOTE ]

This difference is sooo slight (as far as if you are a winning player is concerned) that it could be thought of as no difference; that's how close it is.

[ QUOTE ]
I might not be a winning player at 25-50 but I might be. If i were down 2k the odds of me being a winning player would be much less.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, you are totally wrong here. The ODDS of you being a winning player after being up after eight hours is less than even money; way less--lets say about 12-1 against you being a winning player (not you in particular, but you as the avg. poker player). Now, lets say you lost the 2,000 in the eight hour stetch of 25/50, your odds of being a winning player may have gone all the way up (down) to 11.99998-1 against. So, in this example, I guess you could say you have a .00002-1 better chance of being a winning player if you are up after eight hours vs. if you are down after eight hours. Disclaimer: these numbers could be wAAAy off, BUT, the point is, you have NO idea if you are a winning player or losing player, after eight hours of play.
[ QUOTE ]



Lets move on ,this thread was stupid to begin with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it was! And again, I am not trying to rip on you, I am just telling you that this $2000 win at 25/50 over eight hours means so close to nothing that you mays well say that it means nothing. If you are indeed a 5k/month winner, I am really surprised you don't understand that. I guess all I can say is, be careful.

[operaman]

not to quibble, but i would say for the average player:
(I agree the following numbers are quite speculative.)
8h +2000 =winning player chance of ~1/12 (in agreement)
8h -2000 =winning player chance of ~1/150 (not in agreement)
Note: only %3 of online players are winning players over a multi-year period, %5 for single year as I understand from
somewhat reliable sources. I also understand 25-50 is not a normal stake so the ratios may be different as regards to %3 and %5. It seems winning players win at a particular table about %60-%70 of the time. 8 hours is two sessions generaly. so the odds of a winning player losing 2 sessions is about %15 of the time. Even winning players go on tilt so there should be a clumping effect so lets say %20.
%3x.2=%.6 according to my way to thinking. I am assuming a 1k win or loss is typical for a 4 hour session at 25-50. (+200 -200 is a little more than typical for 5-10.)

[gila]

SO, you are tying to tell me, after 320 hands (40 hands an hour X 8 hours) you can have a extremely high indication that the guy up $2000 at the 25/50 table is a better player than the other guy, at the same table, that is stuck for two large? huh. I've never been able to see that in 320 hands, but then, I only play 5/10 and 10/20 so maybe that is my problem. Or maybe I just suck because I often go through 40BB swings, in both directions, several times a day and go through 100BB swings often. But, if you can tell to a high degree if somebody is a winner/loser after 320 hands, or 3,000 for that matter, all power to ya. Good luck.

[wonderwes]

I could use about three fifdee.

[IronDragon1]

i have a feeling those details will include a request to take "tasteful pictures"